Injustices in our legal system today / Charles Garry

I want to talk to you if I may. Since most of you are. Planning to be lawyers I don't know why. Anyway you're embarking upon a create legal education. There's nothing wrong with being a lawyer but the things that I want you to remember and the things that I want you to think about are in the area of what we call justice. Do we have justice in our present administration of law. Are we interested in justice. We cannot have justice in our court room unless we have social justice. We cannot have justice in our courtrooms unless we have economic justice.

As long as we have 16 million people going to bed hungry each and every night you're not going to have any form of justice. As long as we have the ghettos of America. Those red yellow brown and black you're not going to have any form of justice. The cry of law and order is not going to solve the problems of what we call justice in our courtroom packing our courtrooms with judges. Breather political hacks drunkards incompetent and senile is not going to bring those.

Social justice much less. Any form of justice. I am not blanketing all of our judges. In that category. I'm only blanketing 75 percent of them. The other 25 percent. Are men and women very few women of goodwill who consider themselves to be liberal. Who read with pride. The opinions of Justice Brandeis. And in the later years of the life of homeless they read his opinions and Cardoza and they mouth off. Liberal attitude that when it really comes down to the nub of actually having some intestinal fortitude or did you use the common denominator

of guts. They fall short of that 25 percent of our judges fit into that category. The other 75 percent are all hardline racist. Now to be sure they don't consider themselves to be racist. I have yet to meet my first races who would admit being a racist. Even if you were to ask Adolph Hitler. If you could go back 30 years and say to Adolf Hitler you are a racist he would say absolutely not. I'm a great humanitarian. I did the Jews a favor by exterminating them. And when he referred to black Americans as apes and monkeys he would only say

that I'm being charitable. Nothing is changed just because World War 2 ended with the so-called demise of Adolf Hitler. We have our aid off Hitler's in various degrees throughout our nation. The Kerner report in 1968 on July the Perth came out again and pointed out that black Americans had lost confidence in the system they had lost confidence in a system to such a point that they did not want to participate in any of the functions that the man has created for them. The Kerner report pointed out that black Americans

would not vote in the same proportion the white Americans would. They did not feel that they were part of the system. They felt that they and higher establishment. Was established along racist laws. The Kerner report pointed out that some two thirds of white Americans are over that subjective racist. The other third were not overt races that were subjected racists. Put it bluntly every single white American including myself

have elements of racism within ourselves. If it's true that the Kerner report said that we have a further example in the state of California. Where in 1964. The Romford fair housing bill was the law of the state of California. A group of racers real estate. Operators and their friends introduced a constitutional measure called Proposition number fourteen proposition fourteen declared that it would be unlawful and illegal to have a Fair Housing Law.

Almost 67 percent of the white Americans in the state of California voted in support. Of that constitutional amendment. 67 percent. Pray tell if as the Kerner report and subsequent report and reports prior to the Kerner report and many of the other studies that have been made point out that some sixty six and two thirds are 67 percent of white Americans are over races. Then isn't it also true that the same percentage of Warrior's white lawyers who are practicing law and. In the courts of our land are also white races.

Isn't it also true that the judges. Are themselves part of that same percentage is not also true that the jurors of the jury panel are at least 67 percent over races. What stretch of the imagination and what yardstick. If you are one of the attorneys defending a black American and particularly a black revolutionary for that matter a brown revolutionary or red rebel Revolutionary. What standards would you use to determine and eliminate the 67 And percent Order 66 and two thirds

percent of the judges. If you come before. Or the juror orders. That you come before and a court attaches a. How do you get rid of them. What kind of a yardstick would you use. What kind of a magic wand would you put over their head and say This person is OK and that person is not ok. This is what we were facing when he Newton went to trial in 1968. Charged with the killing of a police officer charged with the attempted assault with a deadly weapon on another police officer and kidnapping. The entire county was electrified. He was found guilty before the trial ever started. He was found guilty the day

that the incident happened. As far as the media was concerned and the press we went to trial we pointed out that you couldn't get a fair trial if he Newton could couldn't possibly get a fair trial. We pointed out the things that I've been telling you about. We pointed out that in the county of Alameda. Where it's divided into seven judicial districts. And five of those districts five of those judicial districts there's less than a half a percent of black Americans living there. The other two judicial districts that's the one of Oakland Piedmont 38 percent for black America.

Berkeley with a heavy concentration of not only black Americans but white Americans and brown Americans and yellow Americans and red Americans who are somewhat concerned and who relate to the problems that we're talking about. We pointed out that the and used the 1964 Proposition 14 as the standard. That the total county. Of Alameda. Voted in support of Proposition 14 in the same percentage ratio as the rest of the state did. We pointed out that in the city of Oakland for instance where you have 38 percent black Americans 54 percent voted

against Proposition 14. We pointed out that in the city of Berkeley which is a township that almost 72 percent voted against Proposition 14 that we pointed out at the other five counties overwhelmingly. Support supported Proposition 14 and that is to outlaw fair housing for instance in San Leandro for instance. The vote. Percentage of the vote. And support. Of the law to outlaw Proposition 14 was almost 87 percent. And yet when you start picking a jury in Alameda County you pick a jury from the entire area of the entire county. It's impossible to be able to detach

the overt races and the extent of this subjective racism. In this present trial where he Newton is now on trial for the third time. We made a motion that the jury be composed of men and women who live in Alameda County but particularly to come from the Oakland Piedmont area because that's where the so-called crime took place and that's where he knew to reside miscible court juries come from there. The judge denied that. Give you a little sideline of one of the jurors. Born in 1893 the real peer group you know I said to her Do you have an opinion about the Black

Panther Party. Well no. Well I have never heard about him. Yeah well what have you heard about him. Well about their breakfast program which I think is a phony. I said What do you mean it's a phony. So there's not that many hungry children. Now can you imagine going to trial before a woman or a man. Who doesn't think that there's that many hungry children. Thousands of children have been fed by the Black Panther Party in their thousands and thousands and thousands more that should be fed. And this woman sitting there with her 1893 mentality. It's not that many children. Now that same type of mentality occurs with the judges and the lawyers.

The lawyer that comes to court with these Eldorado Cadillac or is linked with servants at home is not the least bit concerned about the problems we're talking about. And it's those type of lawyers that get appointed to the court. I've had lawyer after a lawyer say to me over the period of years that I practically say Gary I don't know anything about criminal law I don't want anything to do with criminal law. And 10 years later or 15 years later that same person becomes a judge he's appointed a judge by the political power to be. And you know where to first assignment that he's given and the criminal court and he sits in a criminal court telling me what the law is a man who never knew anything about it where he wouldn't soil his hand.

We have a new problem today a new problem today is that we have men and women in prison who have lost all of their confidence in the system. They were sent to prison because they couldn't make a living so they stole whatever they did they went to prison. Our prisons are warehouses of human beings without any direction to make and change conditions so that when the man or the woman leaves prison he will be able to return to something that was better than that he left

not only spans the dead periods and prison periods that he spends in prison are a humiliating degrading. It's not constructive. They have no rights in prison. One warden said to me one day you know I said this is not a summer resort. I said I appreciate the fact that it's not a summer resort but what are you doing so that that man or person that you have under your custody will be able to return to what you considered a private social life and be a as you have put out a contributing asset to society. Well he said that's not my problem that's the legislator's problem. Well the men and women of prison are no

longer interested in that kind of a salvo. They have decided for self-help. One inmate told me the other day that I'm living amongst the living dead. And he said to me that as far as he was concerned if he could not live with dignity he was not going to live without dignity. And he told me that this is shared by. A great preponderance of the men and women in prisons today. Sunday before last I had the opportunity to. Participate in the people's tribunals in Brooklyn New York.

Where we put on witnesses. To testify to conditions and what happened at Attica and a murder indictment was lodged against Nixon Rockefeller. Oswald and Couso and the head of the state troopers. We presented evidence for four solid hours. This was not hyperbole evidence. This was not hot air evidence. This was evidence of men and women who participated at Attica during the negotiations. We brought in former convicts and their wives to testify to conditions that they witnessed not only at Attica but in Auburn. Over 4000 people were there. That

story is being filmed. I had the opportunity to be the so-called prosecuting attorney in this the first time I've ever played that role. It's kind of a peculiar feeling especially when you when I'm mentioning these things because a hew become a future lawyer and if you're thinking in this area of becoming an attorney you've got some decisions to make. Right now there are six inmates who are charged with six varieties of murder at San Quentin. They have demanded that they have the right

to select their own attorney since they're indigent since they have no money in the court. And Marin County have stated that they are not going to have the opportunity to sue like their own attorney that they're going to pick the attorney for the inmate. I think about that for a minute. If you have money and can afford it you can have whatever lawyer you desire. But if you are poor and an indigent you have to take the lawyer it is being designated to you. Now we're not talking about the public defending system now we're talking about court appointed lawyers because a court appointed. The public defender. Obviously cannot in any stretch of the imagination represent all six because his obvious. Different interests. There

may be conflicts amongst the six as far as the evidence is concerned but the court instead of picking the lawyer that the inmate has chosen that he has confidence in. His pick lawyers that the clients have never heard of. What do you think's going to happen there. Can you imagine those six men who are facing the gas chambers of the state of California putting up with that now when they object to the conduct of a court in these arbitrary decisions. Then of course the law and order cry the law and order people are going to say these on ruly defending these unruly defend their misbehaving just as

they said about Bobby Seale where in Chicago when his attorney was denied a six weeks continuance so he could have a gall bladder operation forced him to go to trial and would not even permit Bobby Seale to defend himself and he didn't even hold a hearing in order to determine whether he had the ability to be able to defend himself. Pre-trial detention. Pre-trial detention. Sure occasionally we get victory. Occasionally we went to K. And then when we won a case they allin they'll say. See the system is working. Let's take the case of the last we have today la Ross that went to the

seventh Chicanos retard with the murder of a police officer. In San Francisco. Before that case came to trial those. Young men had to spend approximately two years in prison awaiting trial while they were awaiting trial now these were students. They were not permitted to have any of their books. They were not able to do anything constructive while they were in prison prison awaiting trial now they have not been found guilty. And they were subjected to the most severe. And degrading form of harassment. Two of the young brothers had. Contracted jaundice can basis. They weren't even able to be able to get medical attention.

After five months of trial the jury acquitted them of murder. You might say the system was working. You know this theory of. Fair trial coat fair trial end of code is a term that's been created by lawyers and judges. It's a false term. It doesn't mean what it said. Because if you're going to have a fair trial and there's got to be a balancing of powers on each side. Do you have a balance of each of each side. The so-called adversary system that you're going to hear an awful lot about as your time goes on in the so-called pretrial or the pre legal training

that you're going to have the adversary system. As far as lawyers are concerned as far as judges are concern is that there's a judge sitting in the middle of the court room with a black robe and making noises like he's neutral and a lawyer sitting representing the so-called people. And on the other side there's the lawyers representing the defendant and now it's true that there's a tripartite situation where the defense counsel and a prosecution and a judge. But it isn't that at all. Why isn't it that. Because before you can have an adversary system that is equal and that there is balance you've got to have power on both sides. The defense has no right except to be able to dig out

what they can ferret out. The defense does not have the right or the power to be able to have the weight of the state behind it. I noticed in the juries that I've. Been picking and even in the last one the prosecution. Has a. Rap sheet a black prospect in Europe and I Pray tell how many black. Men and women who have lived in the ghetto. Can get by without having some kind of a Heritage Month at the hands of the police. But the district attorney has that rap sheet on these black prospected jurors and it embarrasses the person that is on that jury. No wonder they don't want to sit on there. And if you understand the Kerner report all of the other reports you'll understand that black Americans in the ghettos of America

get harus and hassled constantly That's why the Black Panther Party was created. So that you don't have the benefit of even knowing what the other side knows. You don't have the power to be able to investigate and find out some things about the witnesses that the state will draw in there the first time that I put a witness on there. They have the benefit of contacting the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Central Investigation Central Intelligence Section to be able to get the information they have the power of the state behind them. Unlimited power in the case of Angela Davis and Marin County. The state has already spent one million dollars. They've gone to the legislature to get some more money. In order to continue the prosecution. Pray tell where it is the defense able to be able to match that kind of

effort. Unless the lawyers themselves and and friends of the defendant. Are willing to make these financial contributions men and women get railroaded to prison every single day. Another thing that I want to call your attention to along the same lines. The state has had its control the ability to be able to give a particular witness who refuses to testify upon the grounds that it may tend to incriminate him. The state can give that witness immunity so that the witness can go and sing its heart out. The defense cannot do that. And in the case of Huey Newton It's a classic example in the 1968

trial a witness by the name of Bell Ross took the witness stand. He refused to testify upon the ground it would tend incriminate him he was the prosecution witness. The judge and the district attorney couldn't give him immunity faster. Later on in the trial. I put on a witness I subpoenaed him. He was a passenger in the car to Huey Newton was riding in. I asked him the question did you kill Officer fry. He took the Fifth Amendment refused to testify. I said to the judge why don't you give him immunity so you can talk. Don't you think it's fair. Don't you think. If you're going to have an adversary system that there should be adversary right. That there should be a balancing of strengths on both sides. If

you're going to have an adversary system you should have it. You couldn't have a situation where you have the power of the state but all of its billions behind all of its power behind its all of its police state behind it against a lonely defendant sitting in there with a lawyer with his pompousness playing the game that this is a fair trial. It is not a great crime hasn't even got the semblance of a fair trial. And I'm not the least bit interested in the fact that men get off look at the expense that you go through to get off. This is Newton's third trial. I don't know how many more there will be. I tried one Panther case a five time trial.

60 million Americans today black brown. Yellow red and white. Do not get any semblance of justice in our court room. We have what we call a plea bargain a method of justice where you're trying to put a group of charges against you and you try to make a little bargain by pleading guilty to one and they'll dismiss the other when in fact you may be absolutely innocent of all of it but you can't afford to take a chance and stand trial. Now plea bargaining has been approved by the Supreme Court of our state and also the United States Supreme Court. I'm just pointing out some of the problems that you're going to run into. And these are the problems.

And I'm just briefly sketched on them that causes the unread cause as the turmoil causes what we call dissent. It's no longer the same. Our brothers and sisters of our ghetto areas have nothing to lose. They're no longer going to continue on bended knees with black on their lives. That is certain unless the courts recognize since they are the bastion of the establishment they're trying to preserve the status quo unless they recognize that it is going to have to be a lot more bailiff's than the national guard in the court room in

order to what they consider security in the courtroom. You can't walk into a courtroom anymore and defend a person who's even charged with the mildest form of dissent without the courtroom being an armed camp barricade. You don't believe it come to be here we Newton trial. The administration building. They picked the smallest court room. So that the people will not be able to attend the public trial has become a mockery in the soul of that trial in San Francisco. The persons who go there to participate in sit in the trial be graded by the type of research that they're subjected to. The women have to take there have to be examined.

And it is courageous who should be leading the march to the fleet. The other day that he took judicial notice that it's been known that women carry weapons between their profit. You know there's this statement in this saying and let's not forget it. Don't you ever forget it. Revolution is order. Thank you.